Contents

Andrew M. Mead is a justice on the Maine Supreme Judicial Court. He has held this position since April 2007.[1] He was re-nominated by Governor Paul LePage on January 31, 2014, to serve another term on the court and his nomination was then confirmed by the Maine Senate Judiciary Committee.[2][3] Mead was sworn in by Governor Paul LePage on March 20, 2014, and his current term will expire in 2021.[4] Mead must be re-nominated and confirmed to serve additional terms.[5] The state does not have a mandatory retirement age for judges.

Education

Mead received his undergraduate degree from the University of Maine at Orono in 1973 and his J.D. from the New York Law School in 1976.[6]

Career

From 1992 to 2007, Mead served as a justice on the Maine Superior Courts and as the chief judge of that court between 1999 and 2001. Mead has also served on the Maine District Courts from 1990 to 1992. Prior to 1990, he practiced law with the firms of Paine, Lynch & Weatherbee and Mitchell & Stearns, P.A. He has also previously served as the chief judge of the Penobscot Nation Tribal Court from 1980 until 1990, as a judicial liaison to the Maine Rules of Evidence Advisory Committee, and as a chair for the Task Force on Electronic Court Records.[6] In addition to serving on the Maine Supreme Judicial Court, Mead currently is an adjunct faculty member at the University of Maine.[7]

Political outlook

In October 2012, political science professors Adam Bonica and Michael Woodruff of Stanford University attempted to determine the partisan ideology of state supreme court justices in their paper, State Supreme Court Ideology and 'New Style' Judicial Campaigns. A score above 0 indicated a more conservative leaning ideology while scores below 0 are more liberal. Mead received a Campaign finance score (CFscore) of -1.02, indicating a liberal ideological leaning. This is more liberal than the average CF score of -1.01 that justices received in Maine. The study is based on data from campaign contributions by judges themselves, the partisan leaning of contributors to the judges or, in the absence of elections, the ideology of the appointing body (governor or legislature). This study is not a definitive label of a justice, but an academic gauge of various factors.[8]